Improving the FAQ

Anything related to PR, release planning and any other non-technical idea how to move the project forward should be discussed here.
User avatar
Thunderforge
Posts: 477
Joined: 06 Jun 2017, 05:57
Github profile: https://github.com/Thunderforge

Improving the FAQ

Post by Thunderforge » 26 Jul 2018, 19:02

One strategy to improve OpenMW's PR strategy (as described in this thread) is to make changes to the FAQ.

I'd like to discuss that in its own thread, since I think it's really important and people might have a lot to say about that.

What I'd like to know is:
  • What parts of the FAQ should be removed?
  • How should the FAQ be reorganized?
  • What parts of the FAQ should be changed/added? (Please write up a draft!)
If you are suggesting a change or addition, please write up a draft! It doesn't do much good if everybody says "Add a question about MWSE" when nobody actually gets around to writing it.

When we get a consensus on these things, I or another person who can edit the website will make those changes to the FAQ.

User avatar
Thunderforge
Posts: 477
Joined: 06 Jun 2017, 05:57
Github profile: https://github.com/Thunderforge

Re: Improving the FAQ

Post by Thunderforge » 26 Jul 2018, 19:03

Here was Ravenwing's original suggestion:
Ravenwing wrote:
26 Jul 2018, 16:06
FAQ
Raevol very generously helped put together our latest FAQ, but I think it’s time to revisit it to make sure we’re still comfortable with all the language in it and do some updating in anticipation for 1.0+. I’m also thinking it might be a good thing to add to the GitLab wiki so that anyone can suggest changes? (This is pending how exactly we plan to address the GitLab wiki situation, since it isn’t really a true wiki and may actually increase barrier to entry. Zini, do you have any thoughts on this matter?)

I also propose that we split the FAQ up into multiple sections so people can find what they need more easily. The vast majority of users probably don’t care about the ST3C patent, so it might be nice to have a “technical” section. Off the top of my head I’d have:
  • General (e.g. What is OpenMW, info about 1.0, etc.)
  • Installation (e.g. How to install MW on different platforms, installing OpenMW; these would mostly just link to relevant sections in official docs and tutorial videos)
  • Modding (e.g. How to install mods, mod compatibility)
  • Troubleshooting? (things like the audio problem on our current FAQ, not sure this is necessarily the most appropriate place for troubleshooting though)
  • Technical questions (e.g. licensing, technology, “scary computer things”)

User avatar
Atahualpa
Posts: 905
Joined: 09 Feb 2016, 20:03

Re: Improving the FAQ

Post by Atahualpa » 26 Jul 2018, 19:24

I never managed to finish the FAQ videos. However, the corresponding forum thread may be a good starting point for FAQ improvements.

User avatar
Thunderforge
Posts: 477
Joined: 06 Jun 2017, 05:57
Github profile: https://github.com/Thunderforge

Re: Improving the FAQ

Post by Thunderforge » 27 Jul 2018, 04:03

Atahualpa wrote:
26 Jul 2018, 19:24
I never managed to finish the FAQ videos. However, the corresponding forum thread may be a good starting point for FAQ improvements.
Cool! I never knew we had that! We could probably adopt large portions of that FAQ verbatim.

User avatar
Ravenwing
Posts: 219
Joined: 02 Jan 2016, 02:51

Re: Improving the FAQ

Post by Ravenwing » 27 Jul 2018, 05:08

Atahualpa wrote:
26 Jul 2018, 19:24
I never managed to finish the FAQ videos. However, the corresponding forum thread may be a good starting point for FAQ improvements.
Yes, thank you! I meant to dig around and find it, but I was trying to get my other post finished before work and didn't have time! I had forgotten just how very comprehensive it was.
Thunderforge wrote:
27 Jul 2018, 04:03
We could probably adopt large portions of that FAQ verbatim.
Agreed, like I said, duplication of effort: BAD! Both this and Raevol's FAQs are very good, I just think having some headings akin to Atahualpa's document would go a long way to expanding it without making it ungainly. And obviously taking out things like scrawl's website link and other information that are no longer relevant.

I'll try to start combing through both and compiling what we can. That's going to take some time though, so there's plenty to discuss in the meantime!

User avatar
Atahualpa
Posts: 905
Joined: 09 Feb 2016, 20:03

Re: Improving the FAQ

Post by Atahualpa » 27 Jul 2018, 07:16

Ravenwing wrote:
27 Jul 2018, 05:08
Atahualpa wrote:
26 Jul 2018, 19:24
I never managed to finish the FAQ videos. However, the corresponding forum thread may be a good starting point for FAQ improvements.
Yes, thank you! I meant to dig around and find it, but I was trying to get my other post finished before work and didn't have time! I had forgotten just how very comprehensive it was.
I'd forgotten that too. :lol: Anyway, take your time, Ravenwing. I'm going to help you with the FAQ once I'm back from my holiday (= the Monday after next).

I'm also willing to continue work on the FAQ videos. As mentioned (?) in the old forum thread, the initial concept didn't make use of the advantages visual and acoustic editing provides, which is why I changed the concept right before taking a break. The time for thread necroing has come.

User avatar
Ravenwing
Posts: 219
Joined: 02 Jan 2016, 02:51

Re: Improving the FAQ

Post by Ravenwing » 30 Jul 2018, 05:26

Atahualpa wrote:
27 Jul 2018, 07:16
I'm going to help you with the FAQ once I'm back from my holiday (= the Monday after next).
That would be great! I'm planning on plagiarizing large portions of the existing FAQ work that's been done as Thunderforge suggested ;) But there is still plenty of work to do, especially if you resurrect the video FAQ project.

I've started (barely) putting together the outline for everything just to get relevant questions sorted into their respective categories. Will post back here with a link once there's actually something to view.
Atahualpa wrote:
27 Jul 2018, 07:16
The time for thread necroing has come.
I think there's going to be a bit of that over the next few weeks lol!

User avatar
Ravenwing
Posts: 219
Joined: 02 Jan 2016, 02:51

Re: Improving the FAQ

Post by Ravenwing » 09 Aug 2018, 06:26

So I haven't had a chance to really dig into the actual text yet, but I wanted to let everyone check this out for a few reasons. First a few notes:
  • This is a throwaway repo, but thought it would help me put together the basics until we figure out what to do with everything. So don't worry about repo structure and such.
  • This is approximately the structure I think we should go for, with a TOC at the top with the questions under topic headings, regardless of whether this stays somewhere in GitLab or directly onto the website (or both).
  • Not every question that exists in the current FAQ and video FAQ transcripts is on here. This is because some of the answers should either answer multiple questions, or link to other PR content that explains in greater detail other derivative questions.
  • I tried to include everything that didn't seem redundant.
  • Feel free to comment here or within the repo itself with any thoughts.
What I'm looking for at this point is:
  • Am I missing any vital questions?
  • Are there questions that you feel we get asked all the damn time that aren't included?
  • Do the categories make sense?
  • Are the questions in the appropriate category?
  • How do you feel about the number of questions per category, and is that something we should even worry about?
https://gitlab.com/rhtucker/OpenMW-FAQs ... nMW-FAQ.md

As you can see, it's a LOT of questions. I'm not 100% sure how I feel about this. I think it's important to have as much information as possible, but I don't want users to become lost in them. I'm also feeling more and more like troubleshooting should be a separate entity somewhere else, because that has the potential to grow out of control.

I'm also of two minds about the voicing used. In the video transcripts, we had a conversational version, and a more "sterilized" version of each question. I think conversational does seem more accessible, but I'm afraid of clarity being lost. Some of my questions have a little bit of a conversational tone to them where it makes sense, but I wanted to keep it more on the sterile side of things to keep clarity as high as possible. How do we feel about this in general? I'm thinking, due to the shear volume of questions, it's essential that we keep things as concise as possible.

Rovlad
Posts: 19
Joined: 11 Apr 2018, 06:29

Re: Improving the FAQ

Post by Rovlad » 09 Aug 2018, 16:42

"MSE-XE" should probably read "MGE XE".
As for troubleshooting stuff, I think it's fine where it is now, but could be its own thing later on.

User avatar
Thunderforge
Posts: 477
Joined: 06 Jun 2017, 05:57
Github profile: https://github.com/Thunderforge

Re: Improving the FAQ

Post by Thunderforge » 12 Aug 2018, 03:05

Alright, I've created a draft of a replacement FAQ. I've started off with a few minor changes:

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests